OTF

For the shirts themselves I find the Castore to be better than the Puma ones, though granted I only have the limited classic Castore adult shirt and my kids have a couple. Don't have any other Castore stuff.

Yes, your board is incompetent: .........The Steve Bruce Story.........

I'm not going to dispute this, though plenty probably would! Parts of Western Sydney (mostly South West) football/wogball has always and will always be king. I've got family who have moved to QLD in more recent times and we visit them plenty, so Newcastle is now just the place near the Hexham bridge on our trips. I support the Wanderers though I've not been very active in that pursuit for quite some time. I have a much much bigger interest in the toon, I'm happy when the Wanderers win whereas I'll scream out in delight when Newcastle score. Embarrassing as it is (especially given some of the turgid shit I've watched) hearing the blaydon races and local hero blaring on the tannoys instantly makes my heart happy.

I didn't realise you were from Newcastle S, so hope you didn't take offense to what I said between the lines 😉 Newcastle (town/city area) itself is too far from Sydney for anyone from Sydney to generally have visited enough to have even a mildly formed opinion. When I started supporting Newcastle in the 90s I'd only been into the town a couple of times (but then I was pre-teen). The central coast and Lake Macquarie area by virtue of proximity and the M1 was close enough to be frequently visited (day trips or holiday homes). Had/have family in Swansea and Caves Beach way (retired up that way many many years ago) which are Lake Macquarie which is part of the Newcastle/Hunter region anyway. My point was more that Central Coast may be in the shadow of Sydney more than Newcastle. At what age did you leave the region? The relationship between Newcastle and Sydney is probably pretty symbiotic in that they both don't give a fuck about each other. CCM have been shite for big chunks, agree but they've also over achieved at other times in part through bringing in players from Australia's footballing heartland - Western Sydney.

I wouldn't say that even remotely accurate TBH Sammy. Central Coast is a holiday region that became a retirement zone whilst parts became (or always were) quite a bit bogan. It's closer to Sydney than to Newcastle. Newcastle has been industrial since ever and was named after England's Newcastle for that reason. The familiar name is part of why I started supporting NUFC some 27 or so years back. As far as sporting rivalries go they tried to build up both the Newcastle vs Central Coast and the Sydney vs Central Coast rivalries. Central Coast have punched avove their weight for the most part. I've only seen him in the game vs Barca as I've not watched much A-League in the past few years. So I've got nothing to add on his ability except to say if he comes good I've always believed that he would.

Thankfully he's just there to walk the team mascots.

I love a player who stays on their feet when they're fouled and tries to continue the play. The amount of times he wins the ball and then is fouled but keeps playing sets him apart from many others, in particular because he's so strong and determined that even heavy fouls are sometimes but a speed bump on his way upfield.

They could get him and Andy Carroll as a tag team and together they could probably manage to play every other every other game or part thereof. Premier league historians would be all over it.

I'm sure he got a sizeable bonus wedge for avoiding relegation last season and his newly signed contract will have come with a big salary bump and a new set of potential performance bonuses. Even with all that you're probably still right. Chelsea's spending is off the charts.

Agree totally, not sure what point Waugh was trying to make.

Waugh being overly contrary about the whole incident, saying that Willock was never going to get to the ball and that even without the push he would have gone into the keeper (and committed a foul). I'm wondering which angles he has and hasn't seen to arrive at that conclusion as he's demonstratably incorrect with just about everything he says about it to the point where you have to wonder whether he's just drumming up controversy. Willock has a sudden increase in speed and change in direction outside of his control when Mitchell shoves him. Even with this Guaita is clearly going to be second to make a play on the ball behind Willock and based off the angle he was coming across he has no chance of saving it if Willock gets to head it. There's no guarantee of course that Willock puts it on target, but the height, position, direction and speed at which the ball was moving would have made it a spectacular miss if he didnt. It was a fantastic header from Botman keeping it away from the keeper but squaring it across perfectly.

It's pretty simple though; if someone who is employed to help you has had ample time in a quiet focussed environment to review countless replays of multiple angles on an incident and determines that you made a clear and obvious error it goes without saying that instead of looking at the monitor in the middle of a noisy stadium objectively you're looking to see what you got wrong. The VAR should be the one yo make the ruling IF it's clear and obvious as they're in an environment to review. If the VAR can't clearly determine something based off the replays then the on-field decision should be upheld. This includes not only when the footage is unclear but also when there is interpretation of the rules required and it's not clear - e.g. excessive force, some handball decisions (natural position) and the like.

The VAR system is not broken, the referees using the VAR system are broken. It's like they feel they have to leave an imprint on every game, make their existence known. Both situations cited they had no reason at all to interject. They haven't even said sorry or confirmed that the decisions were wrong above, "acknowledge the incidents" is the most cowardly politician style response possible. Unfortunately these are not alone, they just happen to be the most obvious and blatant fuck ups. It's kind of good that they happened so closely because there's at least a chance that they do now take some punitive action against those involved as well as some steps to reduce the chance of more incorrect interference in the future.

@Isegrim is our German relations officer.

@Craig can you please set him straight?

Even more mental when it's apparently the VAR who determines which angle(s) the on field ref gets to see.

A few more games like this and he might start gesturing the other way to Joelinton.

Obviously, but if they can't even acknowledge the most patently obvious errors that are by far the biggest talking points in three or four games then it's a solid indicator for their behind the scenes attitude and what will go on behind closed doors.

Agree 100% Even when they get it wrong you at least can understand why they ruled a particular way. There should be nothing to hide.

His response was measured and reflective rather than angry simply because he knows there's nothing to gain from anger, except to deal with it and move on from it if that's how you work. The Premier League site has no mention whatsoever of any of the drama, so it's pretty clear that their standard response of don't acknowledge the problem will be what we get, with no visibility of whether there has been or will be any action taken behind the scenes to address the various inexplicably erroneous decisions that affected so many results.

Rugby league uses them pretty well in Australia. The captain of each team gets to make one challenge per match to an on-field decision. They have to challange immediately after the play. If their challenge is upheld they retain the ability to make a challenge later in the game, if the original decision stands they lose their challenge and can make no more. If the video footage is not conclusive enough the original call remains and the captain retains their challenge. It still doesn't mean that the VAR (called 'the bunker' in league) gets everything right, but for the most part they do. It's also never a case of the VAR referring the decision back to the on-field ref by getting them to watch certain footage. The decision is made by the bunker and relayed to the onfield ref as well as on the big-screen.

I really dislike that he is so heavily involved in the punditry that we get served up in Australia. One of the last things you want to see after being dudded by a horrible refereeing decision is his face, regardless of what he is saying.

Steve Marshall Barnes' dyslexia is no trivial matter.

The reverse angle of this is vastly more clear that Willock is shoved also, and that does not appear to have been presented to the referee for review.